Hi guys! I recently test drove the 2012 California at Maranello for an italian website. Now we're coming back to test the FF. Apart from the weight, the power and the different kind of cars, what's the difference between them when you drive them fast. How do the FF behave compared to the Cali? Is the gap huge from Cali to FF? Any suggestions?
I have not had my FF on the track yet, maybe this spring, but the fundamental difference is whatever you do in the California you need to be very careful to be ready for the FF to do it MUCH faster. MUCH faster! My FF is at the dealer today with a minor Lift System problem so I drove the California. (The FF has 6,600 miles since the beginning of October, the California 16,000 since December 2011) I have a test route I take folks on to give them a spirited Ferrari drive. On a short curvy section I know when to jump on the Cali to show how well it handles the curves, with the FF I get a totally new sensation as it feels like it is pulling you through the corner while accelerating unbelieveably fast. I am not at all used to the performance of the FF yet but getting there and look forward to a Mid-Ohio track driver's education event this coming summer. To be quite honest, even though the California is a great car, even greater with the top down, the FF experience has made the California boring, and I cannot believe I put it that way. After driving about 45 miles this morning the boring feeling was going away a little because I was getting more used to the lower pitch sound from the V8, and the louder exhaust. My only complaint is the backup camera uses the speedometer for the display rather than the nav display. The speedo display is often covered up by the steering wheel when turning and backing up. I'm sure I will think of more later. Rick
I have only "test driven" a Cali on the road and did a few track laps, but we own an FF (and 458) and I have had a chance to lap an FF. Rick and perhaps a few others have lived with both and can provide a better head-to-head comparison. A couple weeks ago a friend who is contemplating getting an FF asked me to write him a review - apologies as this is VERY long winded...(I cut/pasted but did not edit) My sense of driving the FF The car has a long wheelbase and you sit relatively far back in the car. It took me a bit to readjust my "sight picture" and also to get the steering inputs perfected; the steering is fast like a 458, but what you see and the wheelbase/position require a bit of adjustment - not better, not worse, just different. The car is heavy, and if you are (really) abrupt with it you can feel the weight at times; having said that, it does not feel heavy, and it rewards smoothness and good rythm incredibly well. The size and weight of the car shrink around you as you get used to it and as you push it further. A different view, the FF will surprise you with the absolute level of performance (power, brakes, steering, agility, stability) that you would not expect from a car like this. The engine (power, sound, smoothness, responsiveness) is intoxicating. Very well matched to the DCT, especially Gears 1-6 (7th seems to be "Cruise Mode"). The "all wheel drive" elements are on a different level. This system is NOT four-wheel drive, or even a Quattro-esque all wheel drive approach. In the FF, the car is pretty much a rear-drive car, the front drive kicks in perfectly, only when needed. From a purely technical perspective, it's an amazing mix of mechanical, hydraulic, electronics and software, with an amazing dose of emotion and passion mixed in. In a corner, with some momentum, you can very subtly feel the car moving and thinking beneath you, to use Rick's term, "feel the front end pulling you through". The manettino settings are generally well balanced; i have yet to try (or need) snow mode, but wet, comfort and sport provide solid settings of throttle, shift points and chassis. Quite a few miles on, I could imagine an additional Race setting. Primary downside? Cost, but you also get what you pay for in many dimensions. Guess it could benefit from a larger fuel tank on longer trips. A first drive in the car can be very impressive; the real goodness of the car comes with longer time in it and with it. The 458 is somewhat immediately in your face with its performance capabilities; the FF is more subtle and understated but has phenomenal depth of capability. The FF has an incredibly high "livability" factor as well. Personal view - the controversy of the visual design of the car aside, I believe the FF has been a victim of some poorly conceived marketing; the initial "snow videos" sort of came off as the FF being an Audi Quattro-killer, or a "winter car". I've found the car to be more the ultimate high-performance GT that has great all-weather adaptability, and at that, it's about as perfect an example as i've experienced yet. FWIW, I've never, ever been interested in a "GT" car....I've done utility (trucks) and go-fast cars (e.g.. GT3, 458). This car has converted me...GT is almost an unfair label.
Thank you too Entropy. Very good write-up. I'm riding among Maranello mountains, so speed is not the main element I'm focused on. But I guess the handling is just amazing, as I heard about. An other thing about comparison between Cali/FF is the transmission: I've been told FF one is slightly faster compared to the Cali one. Why should it be any difference since they're both double clutch gearboxes? Could anyone explain the differences?
While my Cali was in the shop, FAF gave me a FF to drive. Let's just say I am about to sell the California. I do not like how it looks, but it may be the fastest and most fun car I have ever driven!
Welcome to the club! I know many think the design of the FF to be somewhat controversial, to say the least, but drive one and you're hooked!
